I agree, those are examples of things that should be able to be deleted from an archive. In my mind those are different issues than just the archive though, and we should probably have laws in place ensuring that content like that can be removed from anywhere on the Internet.

But it really seems like you're arguing that "some content shouldn't be archived forever", not that "an archive must receive consent before recording public Internet data."

If someone go out in public spouting terrible opinions, I think they should be responsible for explaining why they were wrong and why they no longer believe what they used to. That is hard and requires actually growing as a person, instead of just deleting their past and pretending they never said what they did.

An author can tell anyone that.

I really don't understand how this would work. They can't do the normal legal nonsense of claiming they are only selling me a license to the book, if they sell a physical copy of the book to me. After they sell me a physical book they cannot prevent me from lending or reselling it.

If authors/publishers could find some way to legally do this they would, I just don't think they can.

I understand why a library can't make copies of a book (as far as I understood it the internet archive was "limiting" access to how many copies of a book can be viewed at a time) the copyright protections are clear. But copyright does not cover resale or lending.

I didn't know if it did or didn't. But since you say that's the case, that sucks and I hate the publishers even more.

what's your methodology for that 95% figure? because Internet Archive themselves mention no such clause:

The lawsuit only concerns our book lending program. The injunction clarifies that the Publisher Plaintiffs will notify us of their commercially available books, and the Internet Archive will expeditiously remove them from lending. Additionally, Judge Koeltl also signed an orderin favor of the Internet Archive, agreeing with our request that the injunction should only cover books available in electronic format, and not the publishers’ full catalog of books in print

Because this case was limited to our book lending program, the injunction does not significantly impact our other library services.  The Internet Archive may still digitize books for preservation purposes, and may still provide access to our digital collections in a number of ways, including through interlibrary loan and by making accessible formats available to people with qualified print disabilities. We may continue to display “short portions” of books as is consistent with fair use—for example, Wikipedia references (as shown in the image above). The injunction does not affect lending of out-of-print books. And of course, the Internet Archive will still make millions of public domain texts available to the public without restriction.